scholarly journals Evaluation of Supranormal Spirometry Values With an Obstructive Ratio for Airway Hyperreactivity

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R Untisz ◽  
Nikhil A Huprikar ◽  
Robert J Walter ◽  
Edward T McCann ◽  
Michael J Morris

ABSTRACT Background Published guidelines on spirometry interpretation suggest an elevated FVC and FEV1 > 100% of predicted with an obstructive ratio may represent a physiological variant. Further evidence is needed on whether this finding indicates symptomatic airways obstruction and what additional evaluation should be done. Methods Participants were prospectively enrolled to undergo additional testing for a technically adequate spirometry study with an FEV1 > 90% of predicted, and FEV1/FVC below the lower limit of normal, based on 95th percentile confidence intervals. Further testing consisted of full pulmonary function testing, impulse oscillometry (IOS), post-bronchodilator testing, fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO), and methacholine challenge testing (MCT). Results A total of 49 patients meeting entry criteria enrolled and completed testing. Thirty-three were considered symptomatic based on clinical indications for initial testing and 16 were considered asymptomatic. Baseline pulmonary function test values were not different between groups while IOS R5 values (% predicted) were higher in the symptomatic group (126.5 ± 0.37 vs 107.1 ± 0.31). Bronchodilator responsiveness on PFT or IOS was infrequent in both groups. There was a 29% positivity rate for MCT in the symptomatic group compared to one borderline study in asymptomatic participants. FeNO was similar for symptomatic, 26.17 ± 31.3 ppb, compared to asymptomatic, 22.8 ± 13.5 ppb (p = 0.93). The dysanapsis ratio was higher in the symptomatic (0.15 ± 0.03) compared to the asymptomatic (0.13 ± 0.02) (p < 0.05). Conclusion Normal FEV1 > 90% of predicted and obstructive indices may not represent a normal physiological variant in all patients. In symptomatic patients, a positive MCT and elevated baseline IOS values were more common than in asymptomatic patients with similar PFT characteristics. These findings suggest that clinicians should still evaluate for airway hyperresponsiveness in patients with exertional dyspnea with airway obstruction and FEV1 > 90% of predicted and consider alternative diagnoses to include a normal physiologic variant if non-reactive.

2012 ◽  
Vol 49 (6) ◽  
pp. 614-619 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron B. Holley ◽  
Brian Cohee ◽  
Robert J. Walter ◽  
Anita A. Shah ◽  
Christopher S. King ◽  
...  

CHEST Journal ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 104 (4) ◽  
pp. 1119-1126 ◽  
Author(s):  
James E. Hansen ◽  
Richard Casaburi ◽  
Andrew S. Goldberg

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 731 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Frey ◽  
J. Stocks ◽  
A Coates ◽  
P Sly ◽  
J Bates ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Mathias Poussel ◽  
Isabelle Thaon ◽  
Emmanuelle Penven ◽  
Angelica I. Tiotiu

Work-related asthma (WRA) is a very frequent condition in the occupational setting, and refers either to asthma induced (occupational asthma, OA) or worsened (work-exacerbated asthma, WEA) by exposure to allergens (or other sensitizing agents) or to irritant agents at work. Diagnosis of WRA is frequently missed and should take into account clinical features and objective evaluation of lung function. The aim of this overview on pulmonary function testing in the field of WRA is to summarize the different available tests that should be considered in order to accurately diagnose WRA. When WRA is suspected, initial assessment should be carried out with spirometry and bronchodilator responsiveness testing coupled with first-step bronchial provocation testing to assess non-specific bronchial hyper-responsiveness (NSBHR). Further investigations should then refer to specialists with specific functional respiratory tests aiming to consolidate WRA diagnosis and helping to differentiate OA from WEA. Serial peak expiratory flow (PEF) with calculation of the occupation asthma system (OASYS) score as well as serial NSBHR challenge during the working period compared to the off work period are highly informative in the management of WRA. Finally, specific inhalation challenge (SIC) is considered as the reference standard and represents the best way to confirm the specific cause of WRA. Overall, clinicians should be aware that all pulmonary function tests should be standardized in accordance with current guidelines.


Lung ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay Sheshadri ◽  
Leendert Keus ◽  
David Blanco ◽  
Xiudong Lei ◽  
Cheryl Kellner ◽  
...  

1989 ◽  
Vol 150 (12) ◽  
pp. 706-707 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter D. Sly ◽  
Colin F. Robertson

CHEST Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Saunders ◽  
Jeffrey M. Haynes ◽  
Meredith C. McCormack ◽  
Sanja Stanojevic ◽  
David A. Kaminsky

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document